Drip Fertigation Technology for Enhancing Date Palm Productivity and Fruit Quality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A field experiment was conducted during two successive growing seasons, 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 to evaluate the effect of different fertilizer application methods on date palm (Phoenix dactylifera L.) yield and fruit quality grown in sandy soil. Strip block statistical design with three replicates was used on four selected date palm cultivars (Madjool, Sacchari, Kheyarah and Sggaa) as main treatments and three fertilizer application methods (Hydraulic injector, Surface Broadcast and By-pass tank) as sub main treatments. The results revealed significant increases in yield and fruit quality when using continuous fertigation by Hydraulic injector comparing with broadcast and By-pass tank traditional methods. The average of two seasons results indicated also that using Hydraulic injector method maximized Sacchari date yield by producing 69 kg per tree and resulted in the best water productivity (1.06 kg m-3). The use of fertigation method has significantly increased the date palm productivity by 81, 51.2, 66.7 and 72.8% in comparison to the traditional Surface Broadcast method for Madjool, Sacchari, Kheyarah and Sggaa, respectively. The mean fruit weights were significantly increased by 56.5, 72.1, 90.2 and 68.8% when using the hydraulic injector compared to the traditional broadcast application method for pervious date palm cultivars, respectively.  
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it